Disney Being Sued Over Segway Ban

[Lacy]

I guess Disney is being sued by a disabled group over their ban on segways in the parks. Disney says segways would be dangerous in the parks because they can go more than 12 mph. I tend to be on Disney's side on this one. I can't think of many companies that are more accommodating to persons with disabilities than Disney.

[medic9016]

Disney is being sued by 3 individuals, who are trying to get a class action lawsuit. I really hope Disney wins. I see thier side with safety issues. The whole article in on the Orlando Sentinel Web site.

Segways spark suit vs. Disney
3 disabled people say they need the motorized scooters to get around

Scott Powers | Sentinel Staff Writer
November 10, 2007
Three disabled people who say they rely on two-wheeled Segways to move about sued Walt Disney World in federal court Friday, seeking to force the resort into letting disabled visitors like themselves ride the motorized, upright scooters in Disney theme parks.

The three individuals -- a man and woman from Illinois and a woman from Iowa -- also asked that a judge in U.S. District Court in Orlando certify their suit as a class action, potentially representing numerous disabled users of Segways nationwide

[Speedy1998]

I started a thread about this a couple of weeks ago. As I said there my main concern is how dangerous these things would be to other guest. All you have to do is go to YouTube and type in Segway Crash to see How easy it is to fall off of one. (My favorite video has an instructor say "You won't fall over" just seconds before the student hits the pavement face first). I guess my best argument as to why these are dangerous is because of all the people I have seen wearing helmets while riding them. Have you ever seen someone on an ECV with a helmet? Also, the way the ADA works Disney will have to let anyone that shows up with one in, they will not be able to ask for proof that a person is disabled, or if they can use so alternative means of transportation.

[ibrowse17]

I have been run over by strollers and scooters at Disney, and do not wish to add segways to that list. I hope Disney wins also:thumbsup:

[BMan62]

Here's the AP quote...




Disney Sued for Segway Ban
By Associated Press
18 HOURS AGO

ORLANDO, Fla. - Three disabled people have sued Walt Disney World for not allowing them to use their Segways to move around its theme parks.

The plaintiffs are each able to stand but cannot walk far, and they have been denied permission to use their two-wheel vehicles at Disney World, according to the federal court lawsuit.

The suit filed Friday says they're among an estimated 4,000 to 7,000 similarly disabled people who have turned to Segways as mobility tools.

A group called Disability Rights Advocates for Technology, which raises money to donate Segways to disabled U.S. military veterans and pushes for their acceptance, previously asked theme parks to lift bans on the devices. Group co-founder Jerry Karr said Segways offer more mobility and dignity than wheelchairs.

Disney says it fears Segways could endanger other guests because they can go faster than 12 mph.

"We've made our position very clear on these Segways in our parks," Disney spokeswoman Jacquee Polak told the Orlando Sentinel on Friday. "Our primary concern is the safety of all our guests and our cast members. We have a long history of being a leader in creating accessible experiences for our guests with disabilities."

Plaintiff Mahala Ault, 33, has multiple sclerosis; Dan Wallace, lost one foot in an accident and Stacie Rhea has Lou Gehrig's disease. The suit did not give their hometowns, saying only that Ault and Wallace are from Illinois and Rhea is from Iowa.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

[LibertyTreeGal]

I also side with Disney on this one -- there is no need for anyone to be travelling faster than a walking pace in the parks. Anything more than that is dangerous to everyone, and I can see people suing Disney after they fall using their own segways. And if you do allow people who are disabled to use them then you cannot legally (I believe) deny everyone the right to use them. It opens the door up to too many unforseen possibilities.

[Tekneek]

I cannot see how these people have any real claim. Their only claim would be if Disney were denying them access completely. That is not the case. I believe the ADA only guarantees access, not access on the vehicle of your choice.

[DisneyDudet]

There is a big problem with this. I mean... I do not see Segways as easy things to ride in sever crowds and you can't really see below you very well, and little children holding mom and dad's hands can be completely out of view and be hurt. And they do go fast. And really, if you can hurt yourself on your own vehicle, why would you bring it around so many other people. People, curbs, walkways of different grades and texture fill Disney parks.. Just can't see how it would be safe for anyone, especially the rider.

I don't see why they can't store their Segway and rent an ECV, as they are already using the Segway as such anyway.

Besides, if someone were to fall and hurt themselves at the park on a Segway in a crowd near a curb... who would they blame and sue... Disney.

Lose/lose sit. here boys.

[kakn7294]

I also agree that the Segway ban should stand and Disney should win this lawsuit. It's not like these people didn't have any other options. They could have rented wheelchairs or scooters. I've seen those Segways when CM's are riding them around Epcot and they could be very dangerous in the wrong hands. You've got to wear a helmet to ride one - what does that say?

[Speedy1998]

One other thing as far as danger that no one has mentioned here is battery power. When a electric wheelchair or scooter's battery dies, the worse thing that happens is that the disabled person is stuck until someone helps them (with as many people as there are in Disney it should not be too difficult to find someone willing to help).

On the other hand the worse case senario for a Segway is much worse. When a Segway's battery dies the Segway falls over. According to a website I found about Segway batteries, a charge should carry a rider between 7 and 10 miles. Also consider that a Segway weighs more than 80 pounds. Now imagine this, someone who has been riding their Segway all over the park is leaving with everyone else after Wishes, and their battery dies. How many people do you think will be injured when the Segway and rider falls over?

[Ian]

This suit is ludicrous. It should be dismissed out of hand as having no legal foundation.

The ADA only guarantees people the right to have the same access as others ... it doesn't require companies to allow them carte blanche as to how they go about it.

I'm also fairly certain that any judge and/or jury could see the HUGE downside to this in terms of the risks to other guests.

I side with Mr. Spock ... the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. There's about 11,999,997 people who need not to get run down in the parks by nuts zooming around on Segways and there's 3 people who, for some inexplicable reason, claim to need Segways to get around in WDW. I'm quite certain scooters will suffice for their needs.

I'm all for equal access, but let's not get carried away.

[magicofdisney]

Edited: Examples have been set forth.

[Ed]

In the original article, one of the lawyers (you know, those guys who usually get 33% or more of any $ettlement$...) was quoted as saying: "The biggest thing I keep hearing is it is a dignity thing," said Johnson, the lawyer. "People say, 'I don't want to be put in a wheelchair.' "

To carry the plaintiffs' argument to another extent, suppose I claimed that I depended on my horse :horse: to get me around due to a disability because I feel it is "undignified" to use a wheelchair or ECV? Is Disney required to allow me to ride my horse through the parks, into the hotels and restaurants, etc???

Of course not! :noway:


Dignity is one thing. The safety of everyone else in the parks is quite another. My wife occasionally has to use a wheelchair or ECV due to her disability. It has not diminished her sense of dignity one iota.

I'm 100% on Disney's side on this one. :thumbsup:

It's a shame judges can't fine people - that includes the lawyers - megabucks for tying up the courts on such ridiculous, frivolous nonsense.

[magicofdisney]

In the original article, one of the lawyers (you know, those guys who usually get 33% or more of any $ettlement$...) was quoted as saying: "The biggest thing I keep hearing is it is a dignity thing," said Johnson, the lawyer. "People say, 'I don't want to be put in a wheelchair.' "

To carry the plaintiffs' argument to another extent, suppose I claimed that I depended on my horse :horse: to get me around due to a disability because I feel it is "undignified" to use a wheelchair or ECV? Is Disney required to allow me to ride my horse through the parks, into the hotels and restaurants, etc???

Of course not! :noway:


Dignity is one thing. The safety of everyone else in the parks is quite another. My wife occasionally has to use a wheelchair or ECV due to her disability. It has not diminished her sense of dignity one iota.

I'm 100% on Disney's side on this one. :thumbsup:

It's a shame judges can't fine people - that includes the lawyers - megabucks for tying up the courts on such ridiculous, frivolous nonsense.
That argument has no merits, because we all know that IF Disney were to allow these, it would be BECAUSE of a disability. Where's your dignity then? I'm referring to the Segways, not your horse analogy. :)

[2Epcot]

I also side with Disney on this one -- there is no need for anyone to be travelling faster than a walking pace in the parks. Anything more than that is dangerous to everyone, and I can see people suing Disney after they fall using their own segways. And if you do allow people who are disabled to use them then you cannot legally (I believe) deny everyone the right to use them. It opens the door up to too many unforseen possibilities.

I completly agree. Unless someone has some sort of disability that does not allow them to sit down, they can easliy use another form of transportation in the parks. Also, if they can't sit down, they aren't going to have much fun at Disney anyway.

If the Segways are allowed then Disney would have no way of knowing who really needs them. The problems already exits for wheelchairs and ECV. I see a lot of potential for abuse if Disney were to allow them. I hope Disney wins this as well. I think allowing them would invite a lot more lawsuits from people saying they were injured by people running into them on their Segways. Someone walks in front of a person pushing a stroller, you might get a small bruise or scratch ... Someone walks in front of someone on a Segway going 12 mph, they will probably get more then a bruise or scratch.

[Ian]

I completly agree. Unless someone has some sort of disability that does not allow them to sit down, they can easliy use another form of transportation in the parks.And even if, for some reason, they can't sit down, isn't there a line somewhere???

I mean really ... you know there's a disease out there (can't think of the name of it) where you can't go out in the sun at all. It's fatal for you, I think.

So what? Is Disney supposed to enclose the entire Magic Kingdom so people affected by that disease can go??

I'm not 100% sure, but I'm fairly certain that the standard is a "reasonable accomodation" ... allowing wheelchairs and ECV's is more than reasonable, if you ask me.

[Ian]

Two other thoughts on this ...

1. I wonder if Disney will have a more difficult time of it due to the fact that they let their own Cast Members ride Segways around Epcot? Might be tough to claim a guest safety issue when you've got your own people riding them.

2. Suppose Disney loses this suit and then, down the road, some idiot runs his Segway at 12 miles an hour into another guest ... a kid even ... and severely injures them? What happens then?

[Ed]

Two other thoughts on this ...

1. I wonder if Disney will have a more difficult time of it due to the fact that they let their own Cast Members ride Segways around Epcot? Might be tough to claim a guest safety issue when you've got your own people riding them.

2. Suppose Disney loses this suit and then, down the road, some idiot runs his Segway at 12 miles an hour into another guest ... a kid even ... and severely injures them? What happens then?

As to # 1 - Disney can very easily document that their cast members have been professionally trained (I understand that the manufacturer provides their training) and have lots of experience maneuvering them in crowds, but that they would have no way of absolutely verifying the training and experience of guests who want to use them in the parks.

And # 2 - I can absolutely guarantee that Disney would be sued for negligence by allowing their use (albeit, by order of a court) in crowded environments.

Can you say "Catch 22" ???

BTW - This same group is using the same strategy to try to get Universal and Seaworld to allow Segways.

[teambricker04]

Have any of you done the segway tour at EPCOT or FW??? My dad and DH did one just last week. According to my DH the CM had all of them set on "turtle" (slowest speed). At various points during the session both my dad (he has a bum knee) and my DH (very fit, a marathoner) had issues keeping the segway in check. DH says it would be CRAZY to have guests riding around on them.

I can only imagine my two year old getting plowed down... YIKES!!!

[HOLITRIN]

As long as there are other modes of transportation for the disabled, then these Segway's should not be allowed. I can't believe that this has even gotten to a court. No wonder our court systems are slow.

Secondly, I wonder if these same individuals will be willing to take responsibility when one of them hits and injures a child or adult with one of these things. They should be ready for a law suit against them when this happens. I certainly would not hold Disney or any other institution responsible if this is an edict handed down by the court system. :mad:

[BMan62]

And what about transportation? Are we now going to have to make the busses and monorails Segway accessible?

[TheRustyScupper]

1) There is ALWAYS someone willing to sue over something.
2) And, you can bet they also want money, not just use permission.
3) We have had to pay A LOT to install ADA devices.
4) The rule is we must "reasonably accomodate' handicaps.
5) As far as I can see, wheelchairs and ECV's "reasonably accommodateaccommodate".

NOTE: To quote a phrase from Henry VI, "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."

[magicman]

If they win, I'm planning on going a step further and filing suit so that I can drive my station wagon in the parks. :-)

[DisneyDudet]

I'm just not sure of what medical condition where you can stand on hours end, but can't walk or sit.

About the dignity thing... not really sure if that will hold up.

As far as queues... will they be allowed to enter the handicap entrance and be permitted to load just as if someone is bound to a wheelchair? I would feel really angry if someone who has been standing on his motorized scooter didn't have to stand in the queue.

I am all for equal rights and accomodating them, but you can't give those who do not need accommodation the shaft either.

I say, if you need a vehicle to get around the parks, you can use one of the ones approved for the park. If you are more worried about your dignity by sitting a chair, then you should really think about those who HAVE to move in a wheelchair. Be glad you can at least stand.

In other words.. GET OVER YOURSELVES!

[Marker]

In my humble opinion....

I think that since WDW is private property if Disney wants to say NO SEGWAYS, then they should be allowed to without the judicial system sticking their noses into it.

But that's just one person's opinion, which in the overall picture doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

[mttafire]

1) There is ALWAYS someone willing to sue over something.
2) And, you can bet they also want money, not just use permission.
3) We have had to pay A LOT to install ADA devices.
4) The rule is we must "reasonably accomodate' handicaps.
5) As far as I can see, wheelchairs and ECV's "reasonably accommodateaccommodate".

NOTE: To quote a phrase from Henry VI, "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."
Agreed:thumbsup:

[Ian]

In my humble opinion....

I think that since WDW is private property if Disney wants to say NO SEGWAYS, then they should be allowed to without the judicial system sticking their noses into it.Mark, I couldn't have said it better myself! :thumbsup:

[kakn7294]

You know, I'm with Morgan here. As a nurse for 16 years, I cannot think of one single condition where a person could stand on and control a Segway for hours but could not sit in a wheelchair or on an ECV. Generally, if you can't sit, you can't stand either and are bedridden. Granted, I deal mostly in cardiology and there's a lot out there I haven't seen, but this sounds a bit far-fetched to me. I'd like to know what the disabilities are that require the use of a Segway.

[sagessa]

You know, I usually don't jump into controversial threads with more than a statement of facts, but I just have to speak up on this one.

To those of you who think someone with a disability should either sit in a wheelchair all day or not come to Disney: what right do you have to tell that person that they cannot enjoy life? I have a severely disabled friend who is unable to sit in a wheelchair for long periods. He has been discussed on this board several times, mainly in threads about Segways. Sitting without being able to fully extend his leg for more than a few minutes is very painful for him. Should he just stay home instead of taking his family on vacation?

To those of you who are convinced that Segways are dangerous: they are less dangerous than an ECV or motorized wheelchair operated by an inexperienced person. Speedy1998 wants us to know Segways are dangerous because they weigh so much. Both ECVs and motorized wheelchairs weigh far more than a Segway. My father''s wheelchair weighs close to 300 pounds and goes much faster than a normal walking pace. Should Disney make him leave his wheelchair outside the park?

In other words.. GET OVER YOURSELVES!
This comment is completely uncalled for. Would you talk this way if you were face to face with a person whose disability puts them in the position of using a Segway for personal transportation? I'm thinking that you would not, but for some reason, rude behavior that would never be is considered acceptable in person is demonstrated time after time on internet discussion boards.

Kathy:

There are many disabilities that make standing more comfortable than sitting. My friend with the fused hip is only one example.

Rachel R.

[Jeff G]

In my humble opinion....

I think that since WDW is private property if Disney wants to say NO SEGWAYS, then they should be allowed to without the judicial system sticking their noses into it.

But that's just one person's opinion, which in the overall picture doesn't amount to a hill of beans.


:ditto:

[Scar]

I think that since WDW is private property if Disney wants to say NO SEGWAYS, then they should be allowed to without the judicial system sticking their noses into it.Although I agree with your thought, I am fairly certain that WDW, as a place that is accessible to the public, is bound by the American’s with Disabilities Act. Meaning the government can and will stick their noses into it.

Now an interesting point is that the ADA was signed into law in 1990 and Segway’s were invented ten years later. I’m not exactly sure what that means but I would guess the courts would have to decide it.

[kakn7294]

To those of you who think someone with a disability should either sit in a wheelchair all day or not come to Disney: what right do you have to tell that person that they cannot enjoy life? I have a severely disabled friend who is unable to sit in a wheelchair for long periods. He has been discussed on this board several times, mainly in threads about Segways. Sitting without being able to fully extend his leg for more than a few minutes is very painful for him. There are many disabilities that make standing more comfortable than sitting. My friend with the fused hip is only one example.Like I said, I deal mostly with cardiology and in my experience, I have never seen a patient who used a Segway for transportation due to a disability. I concede this point to you. I do have several questions though: Does your friend use a Segway as his main mode of transportation? What does he do when he has to sit since he has so much pain? If he would take his family to WDW, would he be able to tolerate riding any rides or riding around on a Segway for 8 to 12 hours? I'm not trying to be offensive so please don't take it that way. I'd just really like to know what the feasiblity of trip would be.

[sagessa]

Does your friend use a Segway as his main mode of transportation? What does he do when he has to sit since he has so much pain? If he would take his family to WDW, would he be able to tolerate riding any rides or riding around on a Segway for 8 to 12 hours? I'm not trying to be offensive so please don't take it that way. I'd just really like to know what the feasiblity of trip would be.

Kathy, I'm not at all offended by your questions. This thread has me upset because people are making so many assumptions about those who use the Segway for a mobility device. I, and my friend, (he'd probably be happy to talk to anyone who wanted to get in touch with him via e-mail about this issue) are always happy to answer questions. The blanket statements that some have made about what a disabled person does or does not need are what offended me.

As to your questions, he uses the Segway whenever he leaves his home. Before the Segway was available he used crutches. This led to it's own problems, not the least of which was persistent sores under his arms.

At home he either sits in a beanbag type chair (a Love Sac for those of you who are familiar with the brand) or in a recliner, where he can fully extend his leg. When we go out to eat together he sits forward on his seat with his leg fully extended to minimize the strain on his hip that sitting causes.

Riding rides is not a problem; he's actually been to Disney several times. Most of the time, he can stand in line for short periods without the Segway. He does have problems sometimes because the leg with the bad hip is several inches shorter than the other (his Segway has a built up platform to compensate for the shorter leg) and it causes quite a bit of pain if he overdoes it. Like any disabled person, though, he knows his limits. He doesn't do commando strikes on the parks like some of us do (there's nothing wrong with that, I've been known to make an all out attack sometimes :mickey:), but makes sure to take breaks back in the room and not to push himself with days that are too long.

Rachel R.

[mttafire]

I think the bottom line is; Disney does a GREAT job accomodating those that are disabled. However, You just cant accomodate EVERYONE all the time. It is not possible. Even the ADA states "Reasonable attempt". IMHO, Disney goes above and beyond those with disabilities. I believe Disney will easily win this lawsuit.
I also want to add that: I can barely hear in one ear and not very well in the other. However, I manage while on duty. My physician wants me to wear hearing aids but...im stubborn, I wont. I do not consider my condition a disablility. The other side to this coin is that when does the term "disability" get watered down? Alot of folks claim to have one but in reality i would disagree. Im just giving my personal opinion from my OWN experience.
Respect to all, Shawn

[TheRustyScupper]

. . . I think the bottom line is; Disney does a GREAT job accomodating those that are disabled. . . . However, You just cant accomodate EVERYONE all the time. It is not possible. Even the ADA states "Reasonable attempt" . . .

1) We do a lot in the way of "Reasonable" at my company.
2) Yet, we have had to pay lawyers to defend against ADA suits.
3) In each case, we prevailed.
4) The law does not say we have to accommodate everyone.
5) That would be too costly and probably impossible.

NOTE: We have paid over $300,000 in lawyer fees to defend ADA accommodation suits. In each case, the suit did not just ask to be accommodated, but the lawyer wanted penalty money and fees. Gives a rise to the question of for whom is the lawyer working? At least, they didn't get a dime out of us. I love it when greedy lawyers get stiffed. (PERSONAL OPINION)

[Goofster]

NOTE: To quote a phrase from Henry VI, "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."

Yes, but that quote is taken out of its context. If you read on, it's because the speaker of that line wishes to take the rights away from the people.

Luckily, this suit has been filed in federal district court. The judges, at least the majority of them, are smart. I wouldn't be surprised to see this suit kicked on a summary disposition motion relatively soon.

[Ian]

I have a severely disabled friend who is unable to sit in a wheelchair for long periods. He has been discussed on this board several times, mainly in threads about Segways. Sitting without being able to fully extend his leg for more than a few minutes is very painful for him. Should he just stay home instead of taking his family on vacation?If the accomodation he needs in order to allow him to vacation in WDW is excessive or not "reasonable" then, unfortunately, yes.

I mean let's be realistic here ... there can't be more than .0001% of the population who have a disease that requires them to use a Segway to get around.

You can't possibly expect Disney to put the balance of their guest population at risk to accomodate for the 12 people in the world that want to use Segways in WDW.

And you can argue all you want that motorized wheelchairs and scooters are just as risky as Segways, but I'm sorry ... I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. I've never seen a motorized wheelchair that went 12mph, required highly developed motor skills and quick reaction times to operate safely, or that people could easily and readily fall off of. And before you ask, yes ... I've ridden a Segway more than once. Both times I rode I saw people crash them and fall off them. And these were governed down to 4 mph from the standard 12 mph.

I recognize that you have a bias in this because you happen to know someone who's affected, but the bottom line is, the "Right to a Vacation" is not a right that's protected under the Constitution. Unfortunate? Maybe. Reality? Yes.

[LibertyTreeGal]

I think that what much of this comes down to is pride rather than dignity. Now, as the momma of a 6 year old son who will spend his life in diapers but who attends public school, let me tell you that I am big on allowing people to retain their dignity!

However much I adore my baby boy, I do not have the right to place his pride above the safety of others. He doesn't need a wheelchair, truly, he would be more of the Segway type if it ever came down to it, but Segways can fall over onto others. Sure, an ECV can slam into you and OWIE that hurts, but the potential for damage to the operator and their "victim" (for lack of a better term occuring to me) is far, far less.

It is awful that many people are disabled, and I know that as well as anyone, but that is life. We cannot always expect life to accomodate our desires, or even our needs. And I'm not talking about discrimination here, I am talking about reality.

One thought occurred to me though -- how would someone who can't sit down for long periods of time be able to enjoy WDW with as opposed to without a Segway? They will not be able to ride rides, because as someone said, they have to get up every few minutes, and if it is just a matter of having to get up and stretch, then that can be done while in an ECV. I just feel as though this is some sort of straw man.

Please know that I am not trying to be callous here, but how much accomodation is enough??

[kakn7294]

I guess the bottom line here is that if Disney were to allow Segways in the parks, it would have to be only personal models, no park rentals like the WCs and ECVs. That means that the drivers of those Segways are experienced in their use and are not people who are renting them for the very first time at the parks. When you think about it that way, they probably are safer than a lot of little, old grandmas who are renting an ECV for the first time. I've actually changed my mind on this issue now and I think it wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing for Disney to allow them - but personal models only, no rentals outside of the Segway tour. Besides, Ian has already pointed out that it's a very small population percentage who use Segways who would be traveling to Disney. Most mobility disabilities do mean that those suffering can't walk for extended periods and Segways are quite expensive and out of reach for the average person - it won't be likely that most of us would ever even see a guest on one other than that Segway tour if they were allowed.

[caryrae]

If Disney were to lose the case. They should say fine but you need something to prove you can drive the Segway safely, like a Segway drivers license and then they should have to sign some form stating the driver of the Segway is responsible for any property and/or bodily damage done if they were to hit something or someone.

[Goofster]

If the accomodation he needs in order to allow him to vacation in WDW is excessive or not "reasonable" then, unfortunately, yes.

I mean let's be realistic here ... there can't be more than .0001% of the population who have a disease that requires them to use a Segway to get around.

You can't possibly expect Disney to put the balance of their guest population at risk to accomodate for the 12 people in the world that want to use Segways in WDW.

And you can argue all you want that motorized wheelchairs and scooters are just as risky as Segways, but I'm sorry ... I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. I've never seen a motorized wheelchair that went 12mph, required highly developed motor skills and quick reaction times to operate safely, or that people could easily and readily fall off of. And before you ask, yes ... I've ridden a Segway more than once. Both times I rode I saw people crash them and fall off them. And these were governed down to 4 mph from the standard 12 mph.

I recognize that you have a bias in this because you happen to know someone who's affected, but the bottom line is, the "Right to a Vacation" is not a right that's protected under the Constitution. Unfortunate? Maybe. Reality? Yes.

I agree 100%.

[Natazu]

I think Disney should ban everything that isn't completely safe. No Parasailing, no Richard Petty Driving Experience, no Crush-n-Gusher - that one almost killed us both last month. Let's see, Mission Space has some fatalities so it's obviously unsafe, Kali River Rapids has unloading accidents all the time. My niece hit her head pretty hard at the end of Peter Pan a few months ago. Now that I think about it, maybe they should just close everything but the shops. Wait, then people will still be getting run over by ECVs. Just leave the golf courses open where, incidentally, you can use a Segway.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If someone is operating their Segway unsafely, they can be ejected, crippled or not.

In addition, just because someone can settle for a wheelchair, there's no reason they shouldn't use a Segway if that would give them a better quality of life. I could settle for a Volvo but that isn't what I choose to drive. But if I drive around at 150mph, the police will do something about it, even if I'm disabled.

[LibertyTreeGal]

I think Disney should ban everything that isn't completely safe. No Parasailing, no Richard Petty Driving Experience, no Crush-n-Gusher - that one almost killed us both last month.

Jym, the difference between this and the arguments here is that none of these things are unsafe for others (with the exception of ECV's, which I am none too fond of but don't know what we can do reasonably about it). I am not the least bit endangered if you go on Mission Space, parasailing, etc.. (your personal choice, your personal risk) however, I might be if your Segway decides to topple over on top of me because if didn't get a good charge last night. And what if you decide to have a few drinks? Operating a Segway while intoxicated could be disastrous, and yet you could not deny someone the right to drink on site (and frankly, the bartender over at the Rose & Crown would have no reason to deny them alcohol since he wouldn't know). So when we are dealing with a place that serves alcohol, what do we do about someone who is operating a motorised vehicle? Yes, I admit, this is probably going to be a rare occurence, but we live in the age of lawsuits and Disney has to view things from every angle. (And if Disney allows personal Segways, they are going to have to legally rent them out sooner or later to anyone who claims they need them. Just becaue someone is disabled, doesn't mean they aren't just like everyone else. Ever seen a teenager on an ECV? *shudder*) Yes, you can get drunk and get onto an ECV, but the potential for damage is far less. :(

I just really feel for Disney, they are darned if they do and darned if they don't.

[Goofster]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If someone is operating their Segway unsafely, they can be ejected, crippled or not.

In addition, just because someone can settle for a wheelchair, there's no reason they shouldn't use a Segway if that would give them a better quality of life. I could settle for a Volvo but that isn't what I choose to drive. But if I drive around at 150mph, the police will do something about it, even if I'm disabled.

Their better quality of life should not be at the expense of injuries to bystanders. Unfortunately, if a wheelchair or an ECV does not work for a particular disabled person, then maybe WDW is not the best place to go.

As for your driving 150 mph analogy, if you were to crash your car into another or hit another human being, having the police available doesn't do any good. Instead, an outright ban on driving that fast is more appropriate, which, as here, an outright ban on Segways is appropriate and best for Disney and the other guests -- it prevents needless injury.

[Polynesian Dweller]

Luckily, this suit has been filed in federal district court. The judges, at least the majority of them, are smart. I wouldn't be surprised to see this suit kicked on a summary disposition motion relatively soon.

That is a distinct possibility. What most people don't realize is how few lawsuits, both here in Canada and in the US, actually proceed. Just because you file doesn't mean the suit will be considered by the court to have merit to proceed.

I don't know US law, but in Canada you do not have to accommodate someone if it will endanger or impact on the rights of others. We have to accommodate as best we can but not beyond what would reasonable encumber or endanger others. Your law sounds very similar from what I'm reading.

[Jasper]

In my humble opinion....

I think that since WDW is private property if Disney wants to say NO SEGWAYS, then they should be allowed to without the judicial system sticking their noses into it.

But that's just one person's opinion, which in the overall picture doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

Your view of how the courts and our government operate is the view that was in place from the founding of this country up until the 1930’s and in particular up until the 1936 election. Until then the generally held view by the courts and elected officials was that there was a line between the public and private sectors.

However, in the run up to the 1936 election the efforts of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal were having no real impact on the depression. As a result Franklin was in real danger of losing the 36 election. In order to win the election Roosevelt made a decision to make the New Deal personal with Americans. That is when the entitlement programs like Welfare, Medicare, and Social Security took on their current form in which money started being sent directly to Americans. Prior to that these programs (those that had already been created anyway) were much broader and did not allow money to go directly to individuals.

Once this line had been crossed, Roosevelt (and others) saw no reason to stop there, they used this new way of thinking to push for a much larger, and more significantly a much more intrusive government. Thus, we went from a country that said “a man is king in his own home” to “a man is king in his own home so far as the government allows him to be.”

And before everyone goes off and accuses me of making a political statement, I am not intending to do that at all. Instead I am simply trying to point out how and when your point of view changed to what we currently have. It is up to each person to read and understand our collective history and make their own decisions about what is good or bad in it.

[Goofster]

Your view of how the courts and our government operate is the view that was in place from the founding of this country up until the 1930’s and in particular up until the 1936 election. Until then the generally held view by the courts and elected officials was that there was a line between the public and private sectors.

However, in the run up to the 1936 election the efforts of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal were having no real impact on the depression. As a result Franklin was in real danger of losing the 36 election. In order to win the election Roosevelt made a decision to make the New Deal personal with Americans. That is when the entitlement programs like Welfare, Medicare, and Social Security took on their current form in which money started being sent directly to Americans. Prior to that these programs (those that had already been created anyway) were much broader and did not allow money to go directly to individuals.

Once this line had been crossed, Roosevelt (and others) saw no reason to stop there, they used this new way of thinking to push for a much larger, and more significantly a much more intrusive government. Thus, we went from a country that said “a man is king in his own home” to “a man is king in his own home so far as the government allows him to be.”

And before everyone goes off and accuses me of making a political statement, I am not intending to do that at all. Instead I am simply trying to point out how and when your point of view changed to what we currently have. It is up to each person to read and understand our collective history and make their own decisions about what is good or bad in it.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[mttafire]

Your view of how the courts and our government operate is the view that was in place from the founding of this country up until the 1930’s and in particular up until the 1936 election. Until then the generally held view by the courts and elected officials was that there was a line between the public and private sectors.

However, in the run up to the 1936 election the efforts of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal were having no real impact on the depression. As a result Franklin was in real danger of losing the 36 election. In order to win the election Roosevelt made a decision to make the New Deal personal with Americans. That is when the entitlement programs like Welfare, Medicare, and Social Security took on their current form in which money started being sent directly to Americans. Prior to that these programs (those that had already been created anyway) were much broader and did not allow money to go directly to individuals.

Once this line had been crossed, Roosevelt (and others) saw no reason to stop there, they used this new way of thinking to push for a much larger, and more significantly a much more intrusive government. Thus, we went from a country that said “a man is king in his own home” to “a man is king in his own home so far as the government allows him to be.”

And before everyone goes off and accuses me of making a political statement, I am not intending to do that at all. Instead I am simply trying to point out how and when your point of view changed to what we currently have. It is up to each person to read and understand our collective history and make their own decisions about what is good or bad in it.
100% correct......:thumbsup: I think the one thing we all can agree on is; Too much government intrusion is a bad,bad thing.
I knew there was a reason my grandfather "really disliked" FDR!

[Natazu]

First, let me take a minute to say I respect everyone's opinion and their right to voice it, even Ian.


Jym, the difference between this and the arguments here is that none of these things are unsafe for others (with the exception of ECV's, which I am none too fond of but don't know what we can do reasonably about it). I am not the least bit endangered if you go on Mission Space, parasailing, etc.. (your personal choice, your personal risk) however, I might be if your Segway decides to topple over on top of me because if didn't get a good charge last night. I see your point and it is a good one. But I think maybe people believe Segways are more dangerous than they really are. My friend Shane has been riding his Segway everywhere he goes for several years and has never run over anyone, neither have I though I have quite a bit less hours than Shane. The Disney CMs don't seem to have any trouble avoiding guests and the mulititude of other riders I know are doing fine as well.

Are there riders who are dangerous? Sure. I looked at the YouTube vids. Most of those idiots are unsafe and shouldn't be allowed near people. However, most Seggers (yup, that's what they're called) ride safely. And once again, if someone is operating their mobility device unsafely, they should be ejected from the park.


Their better quality of life should not be at the expense of injuries to bystanders. Unfortunately, if a wheelchair or an ECV does not work for a particular disabled person, then maybe WDW is not the best place to go. I couldn't disagree more. Noone is going to convince me that access should be conditional for anyone, period.



As for your driving 150 mph analogy, if you were to crash your car into another or hit another human being, having the police available doesn't do any good. Instead, an outright ban on driving that fast is more appropriate, which, as here, an outright ban on Segways is appropriate and best for Disney and the other guests -- it prevents needless injury.I was a little unclear with that part of the analogy. What I meant was, just because a Segway can go 12.5mph, that doesn't mean one has to drive it at 12.5mph. So really, a ban on Segways isn't appropriate, a ban on driving a Segway unsafely is appropriate. Oh, and crashing into something at 150mph is a self-correcting problem.

[sagessa]

If the accomodation he needs in order to allow him to vacation in WDW is excessive or not "reasonable" then, unfortunately, yes.

You can't possibly expect Disney to put the balance of their guest population at risk to accomodate for the 12 people in the world that want to use Segways in WDW.

I fail to see how allowing a disabled person to use his mobilty device is unreasonable.

I also fail to see how Disney would be putting the "balance of their guest population at risk" by allowing the use of Segways in the parks. People on this thread have repeatedly stated that Segways are dangerous, as though repetition of a belief makes it true.

SEGWAYS ARE NOT DANGEROUS IF USED PROPERLY.

Sorry to shout, but most of you don't seem to understand that. They are no more dangerous than the people who use their ECVs and motorized wheelchairs as battering rams to get through crowds. I would go so far as to say that they are actually safer because of the increased visibilty that a Segway provides, both for the rider and those around him.

LibertyTreeGal:

In regards to your point about intoxicated Segway operators: the exact same thing can be said about those using ECVs and motorized wheelchairs. Do you think that Disney should ban those devices in areas where alcohol is served?

Rachel R.

[LibertyTreeGal]

LibertyTreeGal:

In regards to your point about intoxicated Segway operators: the exact same thing can be said about those using ECVs and motorized wheelchairs. Do you think that Disney should ban those devices in areas where alcohol is served?

Rachel R.

I actually did mention that in my post, at the end if you want to reread it. I stated that the potential for damage is far less. I am actually not happy about either Segway or ECV use when impaired, but the "cat is out of the bag" concerning ECV's so even the discussion of banning them is fruitless. I would much rather spend the morning slamming my head against the wall.

One other thing I thought of -- who on earth can afford to transport their Segway to WDW unless they are within driving distance? And as such, the next step of this lawsuit would demand that someone who is disabled be able to rent a Segway and once that happens, you can not really bar anyone from renting it. Just like you can't bar anyone from renting an ECV.

Gosh, I never felt people would be so touchy over this.....

Perhaps a solution would be that Segway drivers be licensed? Wouldn't be any different than having a drivers license, and for someone as clutzy as me, it would be harder to get :D

[caryrae]

I am sure there really wouldn't be that many people riding Segways at WDW and I would think the odds of me seeing anyone but a CM riding would be very slim. Myself I have never seen anyone riding in public anywhere yet, I never even seen one in real life except at WDW once or twice with a CM riding it.

[Goofster]

SEGWAYS ARE NOT DANGEROUS IF USED PROPERLY.


Rachel R.

Ironically, the conditioning of your statement above proves the point. In other words, to put it bluntly:

SEGWAYS ARE DANGEROUS IF NOT USED PROPERLY.

In essence, you are admitting that an individual, either the seggy (rider) or a bystander, could be harmed if the device is used improperly. Improper use could be any of the following:

1. Renting it for the first time and not knowing how to use it - which, according to Natazu, we should not be conditioning the use of Segways to anyone who might need one at WDW, regardless of their experience in using it.

2. Failing to properly charge the battery, which would result in it falling over onto people.

3. Pure and outright stupidity.

And, any argument comparing Segways to an ECV or a wheelchair is far fetched and implausible. The possibility of injuries from the improper use of a Segway is greater.

Plus, Disney should not have to be taxed with the extra burden of policing those guests using a Segway.

[Goofster]

I couldn't disagree more. Noone is going to convince me that access should be conditional for anyone, period.



So where exactly should Disney stop? If a disabled individual feels that being in his car (or bicycle) is better for his mobility then a Segway, ECV or Wheelchair, should Disney then allow him access to drive his car (or bicycle) through the parks? Or do you agree that there is a line between reasonable accomodation and unreasonable accomodation?

(Yes, the analogy may be farfetched, but when we accomdate, as you suggest, for everyone, there will be some unusual access issues.)

[caryrae]

This is what Wikipedia says about bans and restrictions:

Bans and restrictions

United States
The company has challenged bans and sought exemption from pavement restrictions in over 30 states. The Segway has been banned from use on sidewalks and in public transportation in a small number of municipalities, often based on the fact it is not classified as a medical device. The Segway generally does not fall into the category of exempt devices such as powered wheelchairs, but is more of a vehicle somewhere between a bicycle and motor scooter. Advocacy groups for pedestrians and the blind in the US have been critical of Segway use. Specifically, America Walks and the American Council for the Blind oppose allowing the Segway to be driven on sidewalks, even for those with disabilities, and have actively lobbied against any such legislation. America Walks' official position is:

“ Nothing that moves faster than walking speed belongs in the space intended for walking. ”

The American Council of the Blind's official position is:

“ The Segway may well have a good use and place in our environment, but it is clear [...] that insufficient attention is being paid to pedestrian safety and injuries and deaths are not the price we should be paying for innovation. ”

Notable bans:

In November 2002, before it was widely available, the city of San Francisco banned the Segway from sidewalks citing safety concerns. However, a number of Segway Tour operations use them anyway.

In February 2004, Disney banned Segways from its theme parks, stating they had not been approved by the FDA as medical devices. In the same month, Disney began offering Segway tours of its Epcot theme park. In early August 2007, Disney began offering a similar guided tour in its Disney's California Adventure park in California. The tours are offered during crowd-free periods, prior to normal operating hours for each park.

[biodtl]

I'm just not sure of what medical condition where you can stand on hours end, but can't walk or sit.


My thoughts exactly. My husband has a slight handicap and standing is far more uncomfortable than walking (though he - like the people suing - can't walk for). In fact, I'm NOT handicapped and I can say the same.

If he is having pain, he'll happily rent an ECV and not feel discriminated against or have any "diginity" issues.

This lawsuit is just silly.

[TheRustyScupper]

1) I need the address for the ADA Segway Lawsuit lawyers.
2) I think I need to file at least one, if not many suits.

3) My sample ADA lawsuits
. . . I don't like to walk a lot, so I want moving sidewalks (energy challenged)
. . . I don't like much sun, so I want a dome (light challenged)
. . . I don't like to spend much, so I want a subsidy (fiscally challenged)
. . . I don't like crowds, so I want smaller admission limits (annoyance challenged)

[mttafire]

1) I need the address for the ADA Segway Lawsuit lawyers.
2) I think I need to file at least one, if not many suits.

3) My sample ADA lawsuits
. . . I don't like to walk a lot, so I want moving sidewalks (energy challenged)
. . . I don't like much sun, so I want a dome (light challenged)
. . . I don't like to spend much, so I want a subsidy (fiscally challenged)
. . . I don't like crowds, so I want smaller admission limits (annoyance challenged)

LOL. The funny thing about this post is: There is some truth in it.
It seems that so many folks these days are "challenged" in some way.
Too many folks want to play the "victim card" or "im disabled" when they are no more disabled than i am. (remember folks; my hearing is shot. )
Nice post Rusty!:thumbsup:
I may also ad that im Sleep challenged..( We have a baby girl) can i join you and sue for that too?:mickey:
Shawn

[Ian]

I fail to see how allowing a disabled person to use his mobilty device is unreasonable.

I also fail to see how Disney would be putting the "balance of their guest population at risk" by allowing the use of Segways in the parks. People on this thread have repeatedly stated that Segways are dangerous, as though repetition of a belief makes it true.

SEGWAYS ARE NOT DANGEROUS IF USED PROPERLY.I'm not going to belabor the point, but I did want to respond since this was directed at me.

That's your opinion. And one that is not shared by a majority of the country (as evidenced by the vast number of bans in place on Segway usage in public places).

Remember ... you were the one who said repetition of a belief does not make it true. That goes both ways.

I do agree that ECVs are also unsafe, and if it was up to me, I wouldn't allow ECV's in the parks either. But that cat is already out of the bag. I also don't believe they're nearly as dangerous as Segways would be since they can't travel nearly as fast.

I mean it's pure physics that an object traveling 12 miles per hour is capable of causing far more damage than an object traveling at 3 miles per hour.

[mttafire]

I'm not going to belabor the point, but I did want to respond since this was directed at me.

That's your opinion. And one that is not shared by a majority of the country (as evidenced by the vast number of bans in place on Segway usage in public places).

Remember ... you were the one who said repetition of a belief does not make it true. That goes both ways.

I do agree that ECVs are also unsafe, and if it was up to me, I wouldn't allow ECV's in the parks either. But that cat is already out of the bag. I also don't believe they're nearly as dangerous as Segways would be since they can't travel nearly as fast.

I mean it's pure physics that an object traveling 12 miles per hour is capable of causing far more damage than an object traveling at 3 miles per hour.

Agreed. Ian has pretty much summed it up for me also, No need for me to add to this thread anymore.
Shawn

[kakn7294]

I thought about this long and hard and have finally come to this conclusion: If a person has a medical condition that requires the use of a Segway in everyday life for personal mobility (and not just because it's a cool toy or they are lazy), then I believe that they should be able to use this same piece of equipment at WDW IF they are unable to sit for reasonable periods of time. I'm sure someone who uses a Segway everyday of his or her life and relies on it for mobility would not want to damage their Segway by careless behavior. However, to this end, they should be required to show proof that their Segway is indeed medically necessary and Disney should not rent them out like they do with strollers, wheelchairs, and ECVs.

[Donald Doug]

Real issue with people getting hurt in the parks by Segways isn't that the Segway would be operated in an unsafe manner it is that the parks are normally too crowded. I have witnessed first hand how someone gets hurt by not paying attention to what is going on around them. A few years ago we invited my wife’s aunt to the WDW with us for Christmas. She cannot walk very far so she rents ECVs. One morning in EPCOT as we were traveling in a straight line past SE a woman carrying a child walked directly in front of the ECV and was knocked to the ground. This all happened faster than she could stop of even yell look out. The woman was looking up at SE and never saw the ECV. She started her WDW vacation with a broken leg and banged up little girl. The first responder was on a Segway. After he got the proper people on the scene to help the injured woman and child, he sat with my wife’s shaken up aunt and told her about how he has almost run over people because the Segways are very quiet and people are normally looking around at all of the great scenery in the parks. He said their Segways are quieter than the parks ECVs.

While I don't think they can get rid of the ECVs, they can stop addition of the Segways to the crowded walkways of WDW. Unfortunately the world isn't always fair, not everyone will always be able to do everything want to do.

[tomatoe pie]

i do not think park guests should be allowed to ride their segwways in the park. i have been run over by disabled people on the scooters and in wheelchairs. and it was not because i was in there way but because they insisted that it was their right-of-way and they were insistent. that of course is not true of all people in wheelchairs, but a surprisingly large number of them. i can just imagine what would have happened to myself and my grandchildren if the item had been a much more powerful one. someone would have been badly injured. this has occured more than once .

i don't think the possibility of disabling another person would help someones sense of mobility or dignity. i think these people are just trying to use there disability to take advantage of non-disabled people. after all they are allowed scooters and wheelchairs and special passagewways and seating areas, which i do think is the correct treatment. we all give way to the disabled and try to help, but they in turn should not try to mistreat others.:mickey:

[JPL]

I have tried to stay out of this but of course I couldn't do it forever;)

The estimated number of people in the US who use a Segway as their primary means of transportation due to a disability is about 4000-7000 people of the over 300 million people in the country. I'm sorry but catering to this small of a percentage of the total population is absurd. Where will it end? I mean what will be next someone saying I need a Hummer to drive around the parks in here is my doctor's note. I know this example is far fetched but seriously these people have other options in Wheelchairs and ECVs.

[joelkfla]

I own a Segway. I also own an ECV, which I bought specifically because of the WDW Segway ban.

I can tell you that I have had a lot of close calls in the parks and even bumped a few shins with my ECV, because the ECV is so far below eye level, and people just don't look down when they're walking at WDW. They tend to walk or run right in front of an ECV without even seeing it. A Segway rider, on the other hand, is above eye level, and therefore much more visible to surrounding pedestrians.

ECV's also don't stop on a dime. They have no brake control, and it takes a couple of seconds for the brake to kick in after the throttle is released. (This is probably more true of outside ECV's than the Disney ones.) I've not only experienced it myself, but seen it countless times when ECV riders who are trying to park in the wheelchair slot on my bus slam into the walls. Segways do stop immediately when the rider intuitively backs away from an obstacle.

Someone mentioned modifying Disney Transport vehicles to accommodate Segways. The ramps and lifts currently in use would have no problem accommodating them; the only issue would be securing them on buses. I think a Segway with the control shaft fully retracted or removed would fit in the wheelchair area by laying it down along the side of the bus, and the existing tiedowns could be looped around it top and bottom.

[Crystal Palace]

I am definately on Disney's side with this one! They are too dangerous to navigate through crowds, and I can just picture little children getting their toes run over. What is the problem with using a wheelchair all of a sudden? They seemed to work fine for people before those Segways were invented!

[JPL]

Thinking about this a little further what will stop Disney from leeting non-disabled people ride them in the parks. It can open a reverse discrimination can of worms which is why Disney doesn't question people on their need for an ECV or wheelchair. I am healthy and say I need a segway and Disney allows some guests and not others it becomes reverse discrimination. Banning Segways from the parks is the only way to prevent this. Even if they require a doctor's note these are easy enough to obtain.

[Jasper]

What really makes laugh about this lawsuit is what diseases these people suffer from. One is missing a foot, one has MS, and one has Lou Gehrig's. I can't speak for the person missing a foot and their need for a Segway but I can say that I DEFINITELY don't want to be around the other two on a Segway!

I lost my grandfather to Lou Gehrig's and have a good friend with MS. I realize I am generalizing here but basically both of these diseases attack the bodies ability to transmit signals to the muscles.

Since a Segway requires far more control of your body to operate than any type of wheelchair device then someone with diseases that impair your ability to control your muscles is a DEFINITE hazard compared to if they were in a chair. Believe me, as someone who is about to undergo their sixth back surgery in December I certainly do understand disability and not wanting to be marginalized but I do also recognize that I can't be allowed to endanger others just to satisfy my ego. And it appears that this is exactly what these people want to do!

[jjramsey]

SEGWAYS ARE NOT DANGEROUS IF USED PROPERLY.

Generally, I agree with the above statement...and the 'IF' is a big if!

I work at a company with about 150 employees. There are two Segways there and they are used by skilled riders. Even at that, there have been too many near misses and accidents with them. One was a gyro malfunction that literally threw the rider. I have ridden a Segway and like it, but even at that, every mode of transportation has its own window of safe use (location and conditions).

We have been at WDW when it is wall-to-wall people moving around (Who hasn't been there at closing?) and it is bad enough to be on the lookout for wild pedestrians. Add into the mix strollers and wheel chairs used as road clearing devices and it can get very bad. Now if they allow Segways into the park, even with having ridden them, I would seriously consider whether I would go out of my way to take a vacation at WDW.

There are a lot of ways that Segways can have accidents. Riders should wear helmets, to help prevent injuries from accidents. By the way, if there were no possibility of an accident on a Segway, why would helmets need to be worn in the first place? ...So will Disney now be required that all guests in the park wear helmets, that strollers will need roll bar protection to keep Segway riders and machines from 'dropping in' for a visit and that all doors in the park be made higher to allow people on Segways in, so they won't have cartoon classic accidents?

I vote no to Segways in the parks.

Disney already has many accomodations in place.

[joelkfla]

Several people have brought up the question of helmets and Segways. Just to clarify:

Segway laws are usually enacted at the state level. Most states do not require helmets; some do. In Florida, only riders under a certain age are required to wear helmets.

Most corporations and Segway tours require helmets for a simple reason: to reduce their liability insurance costs.

Because the rider is standing, it's possible (but unlikely) that in a loss of control he could hit his head on the pavement when falling; hence the helmet. ECV riders don't need helmets because they are seated, and a loss of control would likely injure just surrounding pedestrians and walls, but not the rider.

[Crystal Palace]

One other thing as far as danger that no one has mentioned here is battery power. When a electric wheelchair or scooter's battery dies, the worse thing that happens is that the disabled person is stuck until someone helps them (with as many people as there are in Disney it should not be too difficult to find someone willing to help).

On the other hand the worse case senario for a Segway is much worse. When a Segway's battery dies the Segway falls over. According to a website I found about Segway batteries, a charge should carry a rider between 7 and 10 miles. Also consider that a Segway weighs more than 80 pounds. Now imagine this, someone who has been riding their Segway all over the park is leaving with everyone else after Wishes, and their battery dies. How many people do you think will be injured when the Segway and rider falls over?

A perfect example!

[AnnetteFan]

Does this mean that managers and the type will stop using their segways around Epcot? Because I see that as being slightly hypocritical when you have managment zooming around on them when it isn't particularly neccesary.

[jjramsey]

When Disney empoyees use Segways, Disney is accepting 100% liability. Also, I have not seen them used in the middle of wall-to-wall people.

...also, just because employees are allowed to do something does not mean that the guests can do it as well...like go backstage for one.

By the way, skates, as well as the kind on shoes, are not allowed in the parks. ...and yes I have seen people wearing the shoe skates there.

[Ian]

Does this mean that managers and the type will stop using their segways around Epcot? Because I see that as being slightly hypocritical when you have managment zooming around on them when it isn't particularly neccesary.Not at all. Employees of companies are frequently allowed to do things at their place of employment that guests and customers are not.

Also, Disney can ensure that all of their CM's who use Segways are properly trained and operate them safely amongst the guests.

[cgriff]

Disney will prevail in this lawsuit. The Segway, or "Ginger", or "It"-mobile, are a danger to other guests.

cgriff

[Speedy1998]

To those of you who are convinced that Segways are dangerous: they are less dangerous than an ECV or motorized wheelchair operated by an inexperienced person. Speedy1998 wants us to know Segways are dangerous because they weigh so much. Both ECVs and motorized wheelchairs weigh far more than a Segway. My father''s wheelchair weighs close to 300 pounds and goes much faster than a normal walking pace. Should Disney make him leave his wheelchair outside the park?
.

A three hundred pound wheel chair does not just fall over when it is turned off or it's battery dies. A Segway does. This can be extremely dangerous on the crowded paths at WDW.

Also I have never seen a person in a wheelchair wearing a helmet, knee pads, and arm pads. I have seen all these things worn by people riding Segways. And based on the videos I have seen I have no doubt as to the reason why.

One other thing to think about is that while your father's wheel chair weighs close to 300 pounds it was probalbly designed with a low center of gravity (at least that is how one of my co-workers has is designed). So other than being on a very steep slope it is unlikely that it will ever fall over. I have seen Segways fall over when the person was stopped, when they have hit a curb, when they tried to turn to quickly, and when they switched from forward to reverse to quickly.

[joelkfla]

A three hundred pound wheel chair does not just fall over when it is turned off or it's battery dies. A Segway does.
No, it does not. First of all, there are a series of visual, audible, and tactile alerts when the batteries' charge level is getting low. The final alert is a "stick shake", which is impossible not to notice.

Secondly, the Segway does not just "fall over" , the rider simply steps off and holds it, as he/she would in any other situation.

And while Segways do way 70-80 lbs., almost all of that weight is in the base, which is not going to fall on anyone unless they're 4 inches tall. I suppose the control shaft, which weighs a few pounds at most, would smart if it swung into you at full speed, but no more than a stroller or ECV hitting your heels.

[Speedy1998]

No, it does not. First of all, there are a series of visual, audible, and tactile alerts when the batteries' charge level is getting low. The final alert is a "stick shake", which is impossible not to notice.
.

Yes it will fall over. Well it has all these warnings, if it shuts off it will not stand on it's own. If a wheel chair shuts off it just sits there. Also if it falls over I am assuming a human will still be on it, so even if the control stick only weighs a few pounds you still will have a 100 + lb human falling on people.

There are a number of web pages out there put up by Segway owners who were injured because, those safety measures did not work and their Segway shut off while they were going forward.

[Donald A]

Disney is private property. It has a right to keep out things it doesn't want in the parks. Say I have a concealed carry permit in the State of Florida or, for that matter, any state that offers reciprocity with Florida. I am at that point legally allowed to carry a firearm on my person. I could argue that it is my right to carry that firearm. However, Disney has a right to tell me that they don't want that firearm on their property.

So, we have a group of people that want to bring a device Disney does not want there. Quite truthfully, I don't care why they don't want it there. It is not a FDA medically approved device, so end of story.

If I get a doctor's note, does that matter. No. What if I bring a note from my police dept. saying I was threatened, should I be allowed to "pack heat?"

Might not be a good example, but I think you'll see the point. Just like we have rights as people, A private corporation has rights to oversee what occurs on its property.

[Natazu]

Disney is private property. It has a right to keep out things it doesn't want in the parks. Say I have a concealed carry permit in the State of Florida or, for that matter, any state that offers reciprocity with Florida. I am at that point legally allowed to carry a firearm on my person. I could argue that it is my right to carry that firearm. However, Disney has a right to tell me that they don't want that firearm on their property.

So, we have a group of people that want to bring a device Disney does not want there. Quite truthfully, I don't care why they don't want it there. It is not a FDA medically approved device, so end of story.

If I get a doctor's note, does that matter. No. What if I bring a note from my police dept. saying I was threatened, should I be allowed to "pack heat?"

Might not be a good example, but I think you'll see the point. Just like we have rights as people, A private corporation has rights to oversee what occurs on its property.

A private corporation does not have the right to restrict devices for the disabled. That's the issue here, not the blanket Segway ban. If you want to carry your firearm where it isn't allowed because you suffer from a disability, feel free to hire lawyer and sue.

[Donald A]

A private corporation does not have the right to restrict devices for the disabled. That's the issue here, not the blanket Segway ban. If you want to carry your firearm where it isn't allowed because you suffer from a disability, feel free to hire lawyer and sue.

Is a Segway classified by the FDA as a medical device for the disabled? Honestly, I am not sure, but being a physician I have never written for one and never would. If it is an FDA approved medical device prescribed by a physician then it should be allowed.

[Natazu]

Is a Segway classified by the FDA as a medical device for the disabled? If it is an FDA approved medical device prescribed by a physician then it should be allowed.The company that manufactures the Segway has not sought FDA approval because of an existing agreement with the company to whom they sold the Ibot. The lawsuit against Disney is for disabled access under the ADA so the claimants couldn't care less whether the Segway has FDA approval.


Honestly, I am not sure, but being a physician I have never written for one and never would. A disabled person does not need a prescription for their Segway unless they want to talk their insurance company into paying for it. However, I do know someone who has a Segway prescription so there is at least one physician (though he is a specialist) who has written one.

[JPL]

From the ADA

Sec.36.208 Direct threat.

(a) This part does not require a public accommodation to permit an individual to participate in or benefit from the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and accommodations of that public accommodation when that individual poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others.


(b) Direct threat means a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by a modification of policies, practices, or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids or services.


(c) In determining whether an individual poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others, a public accommodation must make an individualized assessment, based on reasonable judgment that relies on current medical knowledge or on the best available objective evidence, to ascertain: the nature, duration, and severity of the risk; the probability that the potential injury will actually occur; and whether reasonable modifications of policies, practices, or procedures will mitigate the risk.


After reading this I don't think this will fly under the ADA after reading this.

[Donald A]

From the ADA

Sec.36.208 Direct threat.

(a) This part does not require a public accommodation to permit an individual to participate in or benefit from the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and accommodations of that public accommodation when that individual poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others.


(b) Direct threat means a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by a modification of policies, practices, or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids or services.


(c) In determining whether an individual poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others, a public accommodation must make an individualized assessment, based on reasonable judgment that relies on current medical knowledge or on the best available objective evidence, to ascertain: the nature, duration, and severity of the risk; the probability that the potential injury will actually occur; and whether reasonable modifications of policies, practices, or procedures will mitigate the risk.


After reading this I don't think this will fly under the ADA after reading this.

I agree it won't fly. Unfortunately, Disney is in a position where you can't please everyone. They get sued for not following ADA guidelines and then get sued when someone on a Segway hurts another guest. I guess this isn't just true with a Segway but motorized wheelchairs too. I have always thought Disney has been good with special needs guests, but I guess you can't please everyone.

[Donald A]

The company that manufactures the Segway has not sought FDA approval because of an existing agreement with the company to whom they sold the Ibot. The lawsuit against Disney is for disabled access under the ADA so the claimants couldn't care less whether the Segway has FDA approval.

A disabled person does not need a prescription for their Segway unless they want to talk their insurance company into paying for it. However, I do know someone who has a Segway prescription so there is at least one physician (though he is a specialist) who has written one.

I do see your points about FDA approval, but I am not seeing how this is an ADA issue.

[Natazu]

I do see your points about FDA approval, but I am not seeing how this is an ADA issue.
Basically, the claimants are attempting to force it to become an ADA issue with the lawsuit.

[AnnetteFan]

Not at all. Employees of companies are frequently allowed to do things at their place of employment that guests and customers are not.

Also, Disney can ensure that all of their CM's who use Segways are properly trained and operate them safely amongst the guests.

I get what you're saying but at the same time I think it would be a nice gesture for them to discontinue the use of segways by employees just to make a point.

[Ian]

I get what you're saying but at the same time I think it would be a nice gesture for them to discontinue the use of segways by employees just to make a point.I'm pretty sure they have some kind of contractual deal with the Segway folks.

They use them for the tour and all, too, remember.

[Mackflava99]

I also side with Disney on this--
If one or 2 people were using it, i guess its ok, but they go too fast. I have seen them in NYC whizzing past me. If 20-30 people were using it through the parks, it would be a real hazzard.

one question- isn't there a Segway tour available in Epcot?

[caryrae]

I was wondering if some people need Segways to get around, what did they do before there were Segways? Also if Disney were to have to allow Segways what would the odds be that anyone of us see some using them on our trips?


I also side with Disney on this--
If one or 2 people were using it, i guess its ok, but they go too fast. I have seen them in NYC whizzing past me. If 20-30 people were using it through the parks, it would be a real hazzard.

one question- isn't there a Segway tour available in Epcot?

Yes there is a tour in Epcot (in World Showcase). It is in the morning before world showcase is open.

[EPCOT84]

I was wondering if some people need Segways to get around, what did they do before there were Segways? Also if Disney were to have to allow Segways what would the odds be that anyone of us see some using them on our trips?

I had similar observation about ECVs. In my '07 trip, I saw the use of ECV's expand compared to my trips in the '90s (gosh it sounds so old now). Yet, once they were introduced, more people use ECVs for various reasons. I have learned from the Intercot boards how and why ECVs are used and now see how it allows more people mobility.

I imagine in time Segways or some similar technology will also create the same discussion. Segways, however, have all the problems discussed earlier compared to ECVs and motorized wheelchairs.

In downtown Los Angeles some tour group recently started Segway tours of the city. I made a point to watch how the people operate it, other people's reactions, after reading these boards.

I noticed that the users had difficulty using the Segway on some parts of the sidewalk and the docents had to stop to help the riders. Yes, the pedestrians would stop and look, causing a pedestrian slowdown (stop and gawk). I saw some problems the riders and pedestrians had moving in and out of mid-day lunch traffic, which would be similar to Disney park traffic. I tried to imagine would would happen if one tipped over during that heavy pedestrian traffic. This is in a business district with mostly adults. Add small children to the mix and it is an accident waiting to happen.

I am not so sure about being able to use the definition of Direct Threat quoted above without reading it in context. It appears to refer a situation where an individual poses a direct threat due to the person's condition (such as a communicable disease or medically caused behavior) rather than a person of limited mobility using a device to aid mobility. However, that is up to experienced attorneys to tweak.

[Snowgod]

It always amazes me how new technology has to fight for its place among us. As many times as I have been run over by ECVs out of control or people running with double wide strollers and yet you seem to think that Segways are dangerous. It is amazing what a youtube video can do to convince people that something is not as it seems. Having run a Segway business I can tell you that there are people who have a difficult time on a Segway. These same people have a hard time with most new things especially if they are balance related. I saw the same treatment given to snowboards when they first arrived on the ski slopes and it took years before people realized it was no more dangerous than skiing. Segways can be limited to a slow key and have great deal of agility in a crowd. As a mater of fact, if you try to run someone over they just need to push on your handle bar to move you away from them. Being run over by a Segway wheel hurts less to me than being stepped on by high heels or run over by an ECV and the small wheels they have. I am sure that someday this will be looked at as just a brick in the road for the mobility of people with disabilities, especially all the wounded vets now learning to glide on a Segway.

[Goofster]

The way the law is written what is reasonable to one may not be reasonable to another.

Reasonableness is not a 'subjective' standard when it comes to the law. It's an objective standard, so it doesn't matter what a particular individual might think in a given situation, it's what an "ordinary" person, making a well-informed decision based on all the facts and circumstances presented, would decide.

[Goofster]

From the ADA

Sec.36.208 Direct threat.

(a) This part does not require a public accommodation to permit an individual to participate in or benefit from the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and accommodations of that public accommodation when that individual poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others.


(b) Direct threat means a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by a modification of policies, practices, or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids or services.


(c) In determining whether an individual poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others, a public accommodation must make an individualized assessment, based on reasonable judgment that relies on current medical knowledge or on the best available objective evidence, to ascertain: the nature, duration, and severity of the risk; the probability that the potential injury will actually occur; and whether reasonable modifications of policies, practices, or procedures will mitigate the risk.


After reading this I don't think this will fly under the ADA after reading this.

This isn't the section covering the dispute. This regulation is applicable where, for example, the person's disability is the direct threat. An example might be a dentist refusing to perform oral surgery on an HIV/AIDS patient because of the danger of the dentist acquiring the disease because of the lack of the appropriate equipment in his office to prevent transmission. Something along those lines.

I think this is the regulation at issue:

28 CFR s36.303 -

(a) General. A public accommodation shall take those steps that may be necessary to ensure that no individual with a disability is excluded, denied services, segregated or otherwise treated differently than other individuals because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services, unless the public accommodation can demonstrate that taking those steps would fundamentally alter the nature of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations being offered or would result in an undue burden, i.e., significant difficulty or expense.

Disney's probable argument in response is that allowing the segway would (1) fundamentally alter the nature of pedestrian traffic within the parks, and (2)allowing their use, including the requirement of policing them, would be an undue burden, would be difficult, and expensive.. Keep in mind, the facts and circumstances, including risks of safety, are all taken into account.

[Goofster]

A private corporation does not have the right to restrict devices for the disabled.

Yes, a private corporation does have the right to restrict, especially where not having the restriction results in an undue burden, etc. It's a balancing act that is evaluated by the courts. Don't give the ADA more power than it already has.

[3Cabsfan]

Sadly some people will fight battles just for the sake of fighting. Segways should not be allowed period. I am hoping the company fights to the bitter end. If they do, they will win.

[dgauthier]

I feel they need to leave the segways where they are: Special tours and for employees only, these things rate right up there with those shoes with the hidden wheels in them. I can tell you from one that has been run over by someones kid with these shoes on it hurts and now think how much it will hurt if it is an adult on a 150 pound machine smacks into you or worse if it is your kid!

[Snowgod]

Now that you all have proved your bias by wanting Segways banned from WDW unless you are charged for the experience. You should all become aware of a group called DRAFT (http://www.draft.org). Check out their website and see why Disney will eventually lose this battle.:cool:

[Donald A]

Now that you all have proved your bias by wanting Segways banned from WDW unless you are charged for the experience. You should all become aware of a group called DRAFT. Check out their website and see why Disney will eventually lose this battle.:cool:

You may have a good point. I don't think we'll see them in WDW any time soon, but from the looks of things the time may be coming. This is actually very helpful information for the current discusssion.

[thrillme]

Segways seem to be very agile. They stop and turn quite quickly. I think the percentage of people that will want to use them (handicap or whatever) are quite likely to bring their own.

Why not simply require a "License to Operate" and require operators bringing in their own to carry some sort of liability insurance. I think the same could be said for EVC's as well. If they do end up injuring someone due to recklessness that person would be covered.

Of course a License to Operate and Insurance is not in the plans yet.

I just don't see them as being that much of a hassel anymore than an EVC, agressive stroller operator or an undisciplined child running and bashing into someone causing them to fall.

[Demos]

I think segways being allowed in Disney would be a horrific idea but not based solely on the operator's good or poor control of them. I was in Disney on Saturday and Magic Kingdom was pretty crowded I can't even count how many times I was bumped into by strollers (at least five times!), wheelchairs, and children (especially if they were wearing heelys! I can't say how much I think those are inappropriate for the parks).

In fact, most of the trouble comes from people, especially small children, suddenly stopping or turning right in front of you so imagine if you will little Timmy getting excited because he suddenly saw Tigger and running right in front of you. That's exactly what happened the other day and I nearly tripped over the poor kid. Imagine if I had a segway going 12 mph (albeit it is the worst case scenario).

And for the many people who actually would benefit from a segway, there will be those few who just use them to tour the parks faster (unless there is a concession made for those who truly need it but how that is to be determined brings about more problems).

My point is that Disney World DOES provide good alternatives to segways and as long as it continues to do so, I can only see disaster if they segways were allowed.

[DisneyGiant]

I just checked out that DRAFT website.

I think they should allow our disabled vets to use them in Epcot & Animal Kingdom (those parks seems to me, to have the most room for the segways to co-exist peacefully with the people walking, strollers, wheelchairs & ECVs).

I can see where it could be considered a safety hazard on the main streets of MK and MGM......

[Jeff]

Now that you all have proved your bias by wanting Segways banned from WDW unless you are charged for the experience.

Those who don't agree with you are "biased" - a classic redirect of an argument. Folks are welcome to their opinions. Having an opinion on a subject does not make one "biased".

[Snowgod]

Having an opinion on a subject does not make one "biased"

From Wikapedia "A bias is a prejudice in a general or specific sense, usually in the sense for having a preference to one particular point of view or ideological perspective."

We are both Biased:cool:

[Jeff]

From Wikapedia "A bias is a prejudice

There's my problem with "bias". I'm not talking about being prejudiced. I'm talking about having an opinion. We have opinions based on our experiences at WDW. We have experiences and observations with crowds, the flow (or lack thereof) with traffic, the set-up of lines and queuing areas. My opinions are based on my first hand observations of those things and how I believe Segways would fit into the above.

I am not biased or prejudiced; rather I have an opinion based on my experiences, observations and knowledge.

[Snowgod]

So, does your experience include Segways?
Have you ever operated a Segway in a crowd? Have you ever been in a crowd with Segways operating around you?
I have taken groups on Segways through crowded places including parks in Florida and have never had anyone hit or run over. I have used my Segway at WDW in the Boardwalk area and resorts and had nothing but good things said to me by the crowds. I love that WDW has some of the nicest places to glide on my Segway and hope to return many times. Do I wish I could use my Segway in the parks, Yes but I also worry about leaving it while I go to the rest rooms or in a store as people always seem to try to get on it when I park it. Just like our President they crash because the Segway is not turned on.
As a last comment on this issue, in 2004 the Segway community had it's annual convention at the Coconut Point resort on the west coast of Florida and the resort let us operate in the resort and everywhere else including riding to and from our rooms and riding the elevators. The non-convention guests seemed to have as much fun as we were and the resort invited us back.:cool:

[starryeyes21]

Just to chime in.....

The security guards at my local mall use Segways to patrol. The are actually very nimble little devices. It is a little intimidating to see this thing come bareling towrds you and I've stopped dead in my tracks a few time when I see it coming. A little bit of "deer in the headlights" syndrome I guess. These security guards who ride them are well practiced and I've never had a problem with being run over. I guess the issue would come in with people who are inexperienced and use them simply because they are allowed on Disney property. If someone gets hurt who's gonna get sued. Not the operator of the Segway, but Disney. I understand their trepidation on this issue.

People with certain physical disabilities use "standers" all the time. I've seen them used in the classroom. Instead of sitting all day the child will be held upright in order to do his work. It can be alot more comfortable.

When people sue it leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth. I don't want my child run over by a Segway either, but the same can be said for any wheeled device. I've been smashed by more strollers at Disney world then I care to count, leaving bruises and scrapes. Should they be banned?

In my opinion Disney should allow them, but not provide them. If you wish to bring your own Segway, then that is your choice. The Disney company should not be held responsible for any damage caused by them or to them.

Just my :twocents:

[magicofdisney]

In my opinion Disney should allow them, but not provide them. If you wish to bring your own Segway, then that is your choice. The Disney company should not be held responsible for any damage caused by them or to them.

Just my :twocents:
The minute Disney gives the green light, you'll have a rental shop set up right outside the gates. They'll probably even offer to deliver your Segway to the front entrance of the park you're attending that day.

[Here we go again...]

Segways seem to be very agile. They stop and turn quite quickly. I think the percentage of people that will want to use them (handicap or whatever) are quite likely to bring their own.

Why not simply require a "License to Operate" and require operators bringing in their own to carry some sort of liability insurance. I think the same could be said for EVC's as well. If they do end up injuring someone due to recklessness that person would be covered.

Of course a License to Operate and Insurance is not in the plans yet.

I just don't see them as being that much of a hassel anymore than an EVC, agressive stroller operator or an undisciplined child running and bashing into someone causing them to fall.

Until you spend a day in en EVC in Disney World you will never know how hard it is on the person riding. For some reason everyone looks at an EVC as fun or an easy way to get around. Well, trust me, it is not.

I am only 44 years old and have had to use an EVC my last 5 visits and I HATE it. Aside from the ugly stares I get I also have to deal with the fact that no one will stop for me. If I am going down a walkway and someone decides to cross they just step in front of me. Is is because they do not see me? Is it because they think I can stop fast? Is it because they do not care about me? I don't know... I do know that no matter what happens next I get dirty looks. From the person I run into because I could not stop fast enough or the person who runs into me from behind because they think I am an idiot that can not drive just stopping short.

No matter what, I lose. I drive an EVC very well, but have had to have family members make a wall around me and move as a crowd to get from point A to point B just so we could move without being cut off.
I would love it if everyone would just follow a person in an EVC for about 5 minutes in a crowd just to see what kind of obsticles they have to deal with. Maybe then you would understand.

Now, back to the original topic. For the reasons listed I would hate to see Segways in the parks. Not because I do not like them but because we have to remember where we are. There are kids everywhere with all things Disney on their minds. If they see something that catches their interest they are going to run. When they run in front of me in an EVC I am at least at eye level with them and have a good chance of stopping in time so I do not hurt them. (but I will make the person behind me mad)
If a kid runs out in front of a Segway there is a very good chance that they will not be seen. I do not want to see what happens when they crash. And whose fault would that be? Disney? Segway?

I think the crowds are just too large to put anything else on wheels into the mix.
JMHO

[Snowgod]

A final comment on this discussion. A Segway weighs about 80lbs. and can be picked up by 2 people with little trouble. An ECV takes 3-4 people to lift before you fill the basket and bags with stuff. The batteries are the heavy part of an ECV but on a Segway it is the tires and wheels that are the parts that weigh the most. I have been run over by both and the Segway was not painful at all. Larger wheels spread the weight.:D

[SpaceMtn101]

Did they never see an ecv????

Ecvs are just as dangerous... i swear they should give people a driving test before they let them drive an ECV. I cant count how many times i have been run over and the toes dont appreciate them. Segways will be just as bad.